InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 8
Posts 2298
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 01/16/2012

Re: pitts77h post# 38664

Thursday, 12/04/2014 12:41:32 AM

Thursday, December 04, 2014 12:41:32 AM

Post# of 42999
The whole turn off the spigot thing is American jargon running away with itself. Smart Win had sole discretion over individual payments. The Contract gave them that in the same condition it clearly says it must not go over $5m.

As soon as the bills submitted went over $5m and therefore the project could not proceed Smart Win had the right to withhold individual payments. They did actually pay the spauldings bill after the budget had been breached - that is fine they had sole discretion,

How Paul can continue to claim they never asked for more than $5m when the Garrison spread sheet clearly shows the due now bills which take the total well over $5m and say all these must be paid before the well can even spud and the sheet show $2.5M of extra smart win funding. It that is not asking for money then it is demanding money with menaces.

Malc's former argument regarding the JV also works against him his view was they were in a JV and his deposition clearly states that Smart Win should have coughed up the extra $500k.

The No JV ruling completely cripples the EEGC case. It is such a shame that it is so unlikely to come to trial because EEGC can't fund it.

I feel a little sorry for Frank in the summary judgement, because Judge Oing did Paul's job for him yet again in finding the ambiguity. What would Judge Oing do to Mad Malc? You could sell tickets.
Join InvestorsHub

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.